Administrators of Dumond v. Carpenter

New York Supreme Court

Administrators of Dumond v. Carpenter

3 Johns. 183

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1808

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 3 Johns. 183 (Administrators of Dumond v. Carpenter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Administrators of Dumond v. Carpenter, 3 Johns. 183 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1808).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The answer to the first objection is, that the first count in the declaration is good in assumpsit, for the law will, and always does raise an assumpsit from the misapplication of money received to the use of another. The answer to the second objection is,, that if a terns' intervene between the teste and return of a writ of inquiry, it creates no prejudice to the party, and is, at any rate, only a miscontinuance, which is cured by the statute of jeofails. (Sayer, 245.)

The judgment must be affirmed.-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The answer to the first objection is, that the first count in the declaration is good in assumpsit, for the law will, and always does raise an assumpsit from the misapplication of money received to the use of another. The answer to the second objection is,, that if a terns' intervene between the teste and return of a writ of inquiry, it creates no prejudice to the party, and is, at any rate, only a miscontinuance, which is cured by the statute of jeofails. (Sayer, 245.)

The judgment must be affirmed.-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Johns. 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/administrators-of-dumond-v-carpenter-nysupct-1808.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack